Electoral System of the United States of America: The Whole Topic in 82 Easy Slides

Presidential Candidate

• What were the two most recent Presidential candidates for the main US Political Parties?

When Do Presidential Elections Occur?• The US has fixed term Presidential Elections, occurring every 4 years. • The date for elections is unchangeable, even in times of war, and

when the President dies or resigns before his term of office is up. This has been seen with LBJ taking over after JFK’s assassination before going on to win the 1964 election, and Ford holding out Nixon’s resigned post until 1976

• The timing is written down in Article 2 of The Constitution, but Federal Law goes further stating that the election shall be held on a Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every fourth year, meaning that the election occurs between the 2nd and the 8th of November.

What Limits You In Being a Candidate?• There are certain personal requirements needed to become President, so

you will need them to success in the Primaries!• Must be a natural born American citizen • Must be at least 35 years old• Must have been resident in the US for at

least 14 years• Must not have been President for more than

2 terms, as the 22nd Amendment States you must not have been elected to the Presidency twice before.

• This was brought in after FDR died at the start of his fourth term in office in 1945

• Some tried to oppose Obama’s election claiming he was not born an American, claiming he was born elsewhere, and that due to his father’s Kenyan heritage he was born a British citizen

Links to Britain• There are no formal personal requirements

to be Prime Minister• Technically, you could be unelected and be

Prime Minister, though this would cause massive upheaval

• However it did occur when Alec Douglas Home very quickly ruled as a Lord, then a Citizen and THEN an MP after quickly responding to Macmillan's sudden departure

• Conventionally, in the 21st century, you must be an MP to be Prime Minister, so there is an age limit of 18 years old, as you must be this to be an MP (it was cut from 21 in 2006)

• Additionally there is a precedent to be a member of the Church of England, due to your large involvement in the church.

• However, none of these are formal.

PRIMARY ELECTIONS

How Do They Get There?• For each party to decide what person they want to

represent them as their candidate, they must win enough PRIMARY ELECTIONS

• These are lots of mini-elections held in every part of the US to allow party members and the public a choice over who they want to be candidate

• These are held between January and June of an election year.

• Even sitting Presidents have to face them

This years Primary for the Republican Party will be the example we use today

So How Do They Work?

• There are two types of mini-election that decides what candidate each state wants for each party.

• These are called CAUSUSES AND PRIMARIES• Both parties can choose what method they want

for each state.

PRIMARIES• Primaries are very simple and are usually

run by state or local government. • They are normal elections, where you go

to the polls to decide who will be nominee• Some primaries are closed, in that you can

only vote if you are a member of that party• Some primaries are semi-closed, where

non-members can vote in ONE primary (i.e. the Republican OR Democrat one)

• Some primaries are open, where ANY citizen (even members of the opposing party) can vote in the primary election

Open Primaries• Raiding- consists of voters of one party crossing over and voting in the

primary of another party, effectively allowing a party to help choose the oppositions candidate. The theory is that opposing party members vote for the weakest candidate of the opposite party in order to their own party the advantage the general election. (a style of tactical voting).

• An example of this is where Fred Tuttle, a Vermont farmer who had appeared in a couple of local films was proposed by Vermont Democrats in the Vermont Senate Primaries; despite being 79 at the time and not actually wanting to run for Senate.

• He had imposed upon himself $16 spending cap, and when asked Why they should vote for him over incumbent Patrick Leahy he answered: "I hope they don't. Can I get out after the primaries? How do I do that?"

Case Study: the New Hampshire Primary

• The New Hampshire primary is the first PRIMARY of the presidential election process.

• It is seen as key to holding the momentum to win the nomination.

• Every President until Bill Clinton in 1992 has won the New Hampshire primary.

• However, recently not been indicative of the winner, with George W Bush not winning in 2000, and Clinton beating Obama there in 2008.

CAUCUSES• Caucuses are not a proper election and are private events run by

political parties. • It is a large meeting in a hall, where party members all debate and

physically take sides on what nominee they want.• To change their vote, they cross the hall to the other side.• At the end, the number of people on each side is counted and the

decision is made.• This very hard-core version of politics means only party extremists tend

to stay for the whole time, thus reducing the democracy of the process

Example: Republican Iowa Caucus 2012• This was a record close caucus,

with Santorum winning by just 34 votes overall from all the caucuses in each county. (see bottom).

• That’s a winning margin of 3/100 of a percent

• Remember, that’s 34 people who stood on one side of a room!

• The Iowa Caucus is seen as the most important as it is first, and thus gives momentum to the candidate

What State Votes When?• The states will always try and get their primary first, as it

will have a greater impact, as candidates drop out• For example, Bachmann dropped out of the race to become

nominee after the previous Iowa caucus.• New Hampshire wrote it into State law that they will be the

first Primary• However, Iowa goes first, and are allowed to because they

technically have a caucus, rather than a Primary.• Therefore Iowa caucuses are a large media event, as it is

the first test of the public opinion• The other noteworthy date is SUPER TUESDAY, where

numerous states all vote on the same day- possibly swinging the result. It was set up by Southern States to increase their overall voice.

• The way in which states try to put their primaries first is known as FRONT LOADING. This has led to a COMPRESSION of primaries into a few weeks in February, meaning the overall decision may be ill-considered as many jump on the bandwagon of one candidate.

Super Tuesday 2012- 6 March

• 10 states took part in Super Tuesday this year, correctly indicating the man who would go on to win the nomination

• Bear in mind that there were Democrat Caucuses/Primaries, but Obama was uncontested in 9/10 states.

• In 2008, Super Tuesday became known as ‘Super-duper-Tuesday’ in the media, as 16 states voted in Primaries on this day

How do these Primaries translate into Selecting the Nominee?

• Primaries are not direct elections.• They in fact allocates a number of people called

‘delegates’ to go to the National Convention of the party and vote accordingly to the wishes of the primaries.

• The more people in a state, the more delegates• Therefore there is a target number of delegates

for a candidate to get.• Simple enough?

SUPER DELEGATES

Complicating Matters Since

1984

SUPER DELEGATES

• While there are the pledged Delegates who come from Primaries, there are also SUPERDELEGATES

• Super delegates are party big-wigs who deserve to have a vote of their own, so are given one to choose by themselves

• Therefore these people have the influence if a candidate has not built up enough pledged delegates by the time of the National Convention

Example: Republican delegates this year

The Republican National Convention is on the 27th August this year, but we know that Romney is almost certainly going to win as he has passed the winning mark of having 1,144 delegates pledged to vote for him.

So for this year, the 126 Republican Super delegates will have no influence, unless Romney suffers a major revolt from his delegates who vote against him, against the will of their electorate. However, they couldn’t do this if they wanted to- as all other contenders have dropped out!

National Party Conventions

• The NPC is also the only time the party meets nationally, so has a more subtle role in integrating the 50 ‘separate’ branches of the each political party

• As you can see in the picture, it is highly stage managed

The NPC originally acted as a meeting for delegates to vote for who they want to be their candidateHowever, today, the NPC has become more of a ‘crowning’ ceremony rather than an election.

Therefore the NPC has more of a role in ratifying the choice, but then also to rally the party round and heal wounds in the acceptance speech. Obama’s acceptance speech in 2008 did this, but this did not happen in 1992 for Bush.

• The party platform is adopted at the NPC, in a similar way to party conferences accepting a manifesto in the UK. However, the NPC merely accepts, not determines them, as the winner of the candidature has already written the platform.

• The candidate hopes to achieve a ‘bounce’ in poll ratings from the media coverage from the NPC. Obama’s speech in 2008 provided a great starting block for his campaign, having been overshadowed throughout by Hilary Clinton

The Vice Presidential candidate was typically chosen at the convention in the past, but now the choice of running mate is chosen beforehand. Romney announced Paul Ryan at a large rally, in front of the USS Wisconsin (his home state). This would have been a good media event, however was foiled by Romney announcing Ryan as ‘The next President of the United States’ before correcting himself. The NPC merely acted as a media event to approve the choice of Ryan, and a means for him to show his allegiance to Romney and his political ability.

The Invisible Primary• The time between the first candidate announcing their intention to run for the

nomination and the candidate being decided is known as the ‘invisible primary’, also known as ‘the money primary’

• This is where a candidate’s fortunes can be decided, as the level of financial support they gain from donors can influence their campaign.

• ‘Mitt Romney, this year's leading Republican fundraiser, has raised an amount nearly identical to his total in 2008, when he was also the top GOP fundraiser at this point in the race.

• But this year's contest has seen few other candidates with strong bases of financial support. Only three -- including one who has already dropped out, Texas Gov. Rick Perry -- raised more than $20 million through January. In 2008, five candidates had raised more than $20 million and three candidates had topped $45 million through January. Both Romney and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani had raised more than $60 million.’

• Therefore it seems in 2012, the winner of the Money Primary did win the nomination, unlike in 2008, with McCain winning despite Romney’s funds.

Main Events in the Invisible Primary• Jefferson-Jackson Day (Democrats)• The Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner is an annual fundraising event for the Democrat

party, and in Presidential Election years are vital for candidates to gain funding• This is held around February/March, where Presidential candidates make a

speech with no notes or teleprompters• They therefore can win or lose super delegate votes here, and more importantly

gain large amounts of funding• Lincoln Day/Reagan Day (Republicans)• A similar type of dinner is held in the Republican party• Smaller dinners are held all across the country, with notable Republicans

attending• Iowa Dinners• When these dinners are held in Iowa, or additionally dinners are held in Iowa

around November, preceding the coming Caucus of the Presidential Election Year. • These are reported on in the media, so can be make or break for Presidential

Candidates.

Where Did These Primaries Come From?• Primaries previously were ad-hoc and not

particularly used by the parties to select candidates.

• These decisions were made by state party elites, and delegates were told how to vote by them

• However, after a chaotic 1968 Democratic Convention where Eugene McCarthy was ignored despite having massive popular support in the primaries and Hubert Humphrey was given the nomination instead, having won the support of the caucus delegates

• In response the Fraser-McGovern Commission was set up, and its findings led indirectly to the establishment of Primary elections in all states and determining what the delegates vote for at the national party conventions.

Should the US continue to use Primaries?• For:• More democratic, and stops ‘smoke filled room’ politics, where party elites

make candidate decisions• Shows who can win and where. Primaries ensure candidates have nation-

wide appeal. In 92 Clinton showed a Southern Democrat could win in the liberal north, and in 04 and 08, Kerry and Obama showed that they could win in the conservative south

• Weed out weaker candidates with little chance of success; Ron Paul may have been a potential candidate, but failed to gain momentum in 2012 despite significant online support for his libertarian ideas on online regulation and drugs issues

• Tests stamina and ability of candidates: The long and gruelling nature of primaries tests the stamina and character of the candidate, and their suitability for president. Despite Romney winning the candidature, slips such as his 47% speech illustrated a lack of strength in character, and being prone to gaffes. This can be seen as contributing to his failure at the election.

• Against:• Go on for too long: the invisible primary means

campaigning must go on constantly to gain funds. This exhausts the electorate and means they loose interest.

• The process becomes trivialised as the media turns it into a ‘beauty contest’ rather than about policy. For example, Sarah Palin became the main attraction in the McCain campaign of 2008, rather than the policies of the candidate himself

• Huge cost of campaigning means huge amounts of time is spent fundraising rather than campaigning. For example, the Jefferson-Jackson Day dinners, plus the $50,000 per plate dinner held by Romney for his infamous 47% Speech

• Give momentum to ‘outsider candidates’ with little experience or preparation for governance. Party selection would mean only experienced candidates go forward

• Reduces party influence over its candidates, and thus leads to less cohesion between Congressional and Presidential party lines.

• Divisive contests: Primaries mean intra-party rivalries and criticisms of their candidates. This happened in 1992 with George Bush Sr., where he had a fight in his primaries, and the criticisms of Pat Buchanan forced him to move to the right, and thus allowed Clinton to win the resulting election.

• Low turnout leading to unrepresentative results• Must pull to the extremes to encourage the vote from the

party, but then move to the centre in the Presidential campaign.

Primary Elections: Comparisons to Britain

• There are very little comparisons to the Primary elections in the USA.

• While there may be a small ‘media primary’ between the few possibilities to become party leader, the decision lies with the party.

• However, the approval of this at the NPC is similar to how elections can be held at party conferences.

THUS BEGINS THE

THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

Start of Campaign• The Presidential campaign officially begins on Labor Day, the

first Monday in September• However, campaigning usually begins way before this, mixed

into the primary campaigns• They have to influence an electorate of 20 million voters, in

50 states of varying importance• There can be seen to be 3 objectives for the campaign:• ‘Energise the Base’: Motivate the core supporters and make

sure they turn out to vote• ‘Win the independent vote’: Catch the floating voters and

swing them to your side• ‘Create Momentum’: Get the campaign going, keep funds

high and make an electoral bandwagon

• Main areas to concentrate on in campaigns:• Swing states: As will be seen later, states such as

Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida have a huge amount of time spent upon them due to the failings of the electoral college system, and the fact these states contain swing voters, that may vote either way. Therefore the elderly voters of Florida and the industrial workers of Ohio make a powerful group in Presidential elections.

Specialist Advisors: Presidential Candidates use specialist advisors to run their election campaigns. Obama used Clinton’s former advisor David Axelrod to look after his 2008 and 2012 campaigns

• Other groups must be targeted as well, the female and now Hispanic vote becoming much more prominent.

• Candidates cannot now rely upon large numbers of aligned voters turning out amid growing political apathy

• Incumbency can also affect your election chances. By being in power, you can look more powerful and presidential than a mere outsider. However, this did not help Jimmy Carter in 1980 and HW Bush in 1992, as other factors were more important.

This is usually seen as more important in Congressional elections, where senators and representatives can take credit for securing federal funding for local ‘pork barrel’ projects.

• Candidates make appeals to voters on the grounds of:• Their alignment to a party, calling upon their self concept of being a

Republican or Democrat• Their personal characteristics; George W Bush was seen as winning the

2004 down to the fact he was more like a ‘normal guy’ than John Kerry. • Policy issues on important areas. Some issues divide certain social

groups, and are known as ‘Wedge issues’ for example, Abortion is a wedge issue for Hispanic voters, as voting Democrat would allow greater abortion rights, which the catholic Hispanics oppose, but the greater help for ethnic minorities from the Democrats splits the Hispanic vote.

Comparisons to Britain• In Britain, General Elections could be surprising things. In 2010, no one

could tell when Brown was going to have to let go and call an election• However, with fixed term parliaments now, it will have to be seen when

the next general election campaign starts now that the date is known. • That is, of course, presuming the government does not collapse prior to

this!• Swing seats are also vital in the UK, with marginal constituencies being

the vital thing needed to win general elections.• The immigrant vote in the UK is not a major target for any political party,

except the possibility of the Respect party and George Galloway• Personality has become a greater issue, with Tony Blair trying to appear

as a ‘normal guy’ and Cameron and Osborne being criticised and Tory Toffs.

• Wedge issues are not as obvious, but the EU and Gay Marriage is one forcing the Conservative party apart, with the rise of UKIP

Impact of Media Upon Campaigns

• Methods of Communication:• Old Style Campaigns- Visiting Key

States and making Speeches• Televised Debates• Focus Groups• Political advertising, via old and

new media

Four Main Influences of Media on Campaigns

1. ‘Personalises’ the Campaign. Tend to focus on image and appearance rather than on policy decisions. Arguably, Presidents such as Lincoln would not have the look or style to become President today, especially in comparison with the first media-centred President that was Kennedy.

2. Makes the campaigns run ‘24/7’. Campaigns now have to be run by experienced media advisers and pollsters who use focus groups and ‘voter meters’ to gauge public reaction to what the candidates are saying.

3. Photo opportunities are at a premium, as candidates try to get as much time on the ‘free media’ of news channels such as Fox, CNN and MSBNC rather than the paid media of television advertising. Coining the best sound bite is seen as a competition between the two candidates, which Obama superbly won in 2008 with ‘Yes We Can’. Compared to the media performance of McCain, Obama was surely the favourite of the press. This media emphasis benefitted Reagan, but hindered people such as Gore.

4. Cable networks are used to sent highly targeted messages to certain groups. For example, the Christian Broadcasting Network can influence religious voters on issues such and abortion or gay marriage. Conservative ‘Shock Jock’ radio presenters can influence voters to the right. For example, look at the impact of Alex Jones while interviewed by Piers Morgan. Pro tip: Don’t type ‘Shock Jock’ into Google Images

TV Campaigning• TV advertising time is one of the greatest expenses in

a presidential campaign. • TV advertising is highly unlikely to actually convince

voters to switch sides, but is more used to ‘energise the base’ of already established voters.

• Because of this, there has been a rise in ‘negative campaigning’, where the opponents are put down rather than positive messages are put forward

• An example of this is the 2004 ad by Swift Boat Veterans for Justice, which questioned John Kerry’s patriotism and loyalty in the Vietnam war, and portrayed him as going back on his comrades.

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phqOuEhg9yE• This negative campaigning may be representative of a

more partisan nature of US politics.

The Debates• The television debates that take place through the

presidential campaign, also known as ‘The Great Debates’ are a highly debatable topic themselves

• The now established tradition started in 1960, between Nixon and Kennedy. However, the results of these can be inconclusive, with TV viewers arguing a victory for Kennedy and radio listeners hearing a triumph for Nixon! Clearly image may have a part to play in these debates.

• Debates have no evolved into highly stage managed affairs, as each candidate tries to score points off each other.

• Many viewers seem to respond to the debates on style rather than substance, judging who has the most presidential performance

• Performance in these debates can affect polls, and can act as turning points in campaigns.

• In 2012, Obama took a serious dent in the polls after a couple of disappointing performances in the first two debates, but managed to re-establish his lead later on.

Comparison to Britain

• TV advertising has not such a great influence in the UK due to high restrictions upon it.

• Party political broadcasts are severely limited in the UK, and pressure groups no not advertise greatly

• However the UK does have prime ministerial debates.

• The results of these seem inconclusive however, as they caused a huge surge in popularity for Clegg, yet the Lib Dems had a disappointing 2010 election

CAMPAIGN FINANCE

‘The Best Democracy Money Can Buy’• The importance of money and funding has become much more

prominent in US electoral campaigns for a number of reasons:• High cost of television advertising• Size of country, and the travel and accommodation it incurs.The diversity of voters that need to be appealed to. (Women may need an individual campaign, Hispanics may require campaign materials in Spanish!)Need to hire specialist staff to run a modern campaign. Need specialists to run online campaigns, which Obama has done very well, hiring a whole team under Joe Rospars leadership.The permanent nature of campaigning; the next campaign begins the day after the election.

Where does this campaign funding come from?

• Their own pocket- Mitt Romney was criticised for funding a lot of his campaign with his vast personal wealth.

• Political Action Committees (PACs)• National and Congressional party committees• ‘527 groups’ and ‘Super PACs’ raising money to

spend on issue advocacy on behalf of the candidates• Fundraising through the internet and social media,

which Obama superbly did in 2008.

Federal Election Campaign Act 1971• The FECA act of 1971 and its later amendments were put in place to provide federal

funding for presidential (not congressional) elections, with matching funds provided for candidates who could raise lots of small donations from at least 20 states. This is designed to help outsider but serious candidates like Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Clinton in 1992.

• Federal funding is offered to each Presidential candidate. If they accept it they must accept spending limits on their campaign, as John McCain did in 2008. However, if you are to turn down federal funding assistance, as Obama did in 2008, you can raise unlimited amounts on your campaign and spend it as you please.

Because of FECA, all contributions to candidates must be disclosed and monitored by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), making the process open and transparentLimits are also in place on money given directly to candidates, called ‘hard money’. Hard Money is money used EXPLICITLY to promote a candidate, and is regulated heavily. Soft Money is money given to political parties for ‘party building’ exercises. As FECA didn’t define ‘party building’ activities, these can be used to promote certain issues, attack other candidates but NOT enhance a certain candidate

Impact of FECA

• Federal Funding installed by FECA went to the candidate, not the party, meaning the campaign was very personalised and less involved with the party.

• The reform reinforced the 2 party system, as smaller candidates fail to meet the 5% share of the vote at last election necessary to receive funding.

• Advantages remain for rich candidates that can just spend their own money, without any restrictions

• FECA is not even fully in force, with large parts being ruled unconstitutional in Buckley v Valeo (1976) as freedom to spend money expressing political opinions could not be denied under the 1st Amendment

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002 (McCain-Feingold)

• The main loophole in FECA was soft money• Also there was ‘issue advocacy’ where groups could

indirectly promote a candidate by criticising their opponent on a certain issue. E.g. the NRA attacking Obama’s ideas on Gun Control to indirectly benefit Romney

• However in 2002 the BCRA was passed which banned all soft money contributions to candidates or parties and increased the upper limit on hard money donations from individuals to $2000 (now $2500)

Results

• Campaign finance strategy changed, with candidates now trying to make appeals to a wide number of people, particularly using the internet for small donations from many people.

• Led to the growth of 527 groups, named after their tax code, which are groups allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money for ‘general political activities’, but are not allowed to coordinate their activities.

• The ‘Swift Boat Veterans for Truth’ were one of these groups, and launched their attack on Kerry in 2004

FEC v Citizens United• In January 2010 the Supreme Court decided in a 5/4 decision based on the

first amendment that blew a massive hole in these restrictions.• It allows corporations, unions and individuals to make unlimited donations

to partisan groups (Super PACs) which campaign for or against electoral candidates. (these differ from other forms of PAC as they cannot supply hard money to candidates)

• This has led to special interest funding, with the US Chambers of Commerce campaigning to defeat lawmakers who voted for healthcare reform in the 2010 midterms

• In the 2012 election, the highest spending Super PAC, ‘Restore Our Future’ spent $142,097,462 overall, $13,919,922 supporting a candidate (Romney, around 10% of all their spending) and $128,177,540 attacking candidates ($88,572,359 of which was at Obama, Opposition spending making up 90% of all spending)

• The top individual donor to this Super PAC: $15,000,000 from Sheldon Adelson (CEO, Las Vegas Sands Corp.)

Impact• Obama has described these as a ‘threat to democracy’.

However, he did make these comments before the second largest PAC spent all of its $64,799,242 funding on attacking Mitt Romney in 2012.

• Another problem with PAC’s is that while they must disclose donors to the FEC, they can channel funds from certain advocacy groups that no not require disclosure of funds.

• Is there ever a solution to candidates ‘buying the election’ as long as there is a 1st Amendment?

• Does buying the election matter? Romney did, but he did not win, and was brought down by a YouTube video, posted for free!

Comparison to UK

• The UK general election involves a lot less money, but also is more unashamedly bankrolled by large groups and individuals

• The Labour Party has for a long time relied on Unions for funding, like the Democrat party but to a much greater extent

• Additionally, the support of the Conservatives from Business groups is much like the Republican party in the USA.

ELECTORAL COLLEGE

Electoral College

• Electoral College is the name for the unique way the US elects their President

• Rather than being a nice straightforward direct system, like the French use, the US system is indirect and quite complicated (yay!)

YouTube

Thankfully, YouTube comes to our help here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUS9mM8Xbbw&list=PL87DB3F7E8107A4AE&index=5&feature=plcp

CGP Grey- Electoral College

Points to Add On• You see that bit about the 538 electoral college votes?

The reason there are 100 senators in the Senate and the 438 Representatives in the House of Representatives is back to the Connecticut Compromise on the electoral system

• The New Jersey plan of having an equal representation of States to allow smaller states a voice is reflected in the Senate, with two senators each.

• The Virginia plan of having larger states represented more is reflected in the size allocated House of Representatives

• Any other things to add?

Comparison to UK:

Winner Takes It All

• One similarity is the way that the winner takes all of the electoral votes in a state if they have more votes than any other candidate

• While for most of this it may have seemed that you needed over 50% of the vote to win a state, this is due to the low significance of minor parties in the US.

• Therefore, the Electoral College has a form of FPTP, only sending forth electors, rather than MPs to the House of Commons.

PROBLEMS WITH THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

Equality of Votes• The main problem with the Electoral College is that

some citizens votes count more than others.• If you were to distribute the 538 electoral college

votes over the whole population:

• However inequalities between citizens votes occur because the system awards the electoral college votes to STATES not people.

For example, Ohio should receive 20 electoral votes due to the size of their population. However, it only receives 18- this is because these two extra electoral votes go to small states like Rhode Island, as all states are entitled to 3 electoral votes as well as electoral votes distributed by their population. (Rhode Island has a population worth 1 vote, so has 4 overall)

What is the result of this:• As a result, the electoral college treats smaller states

as if they have more people in them, whereas they see larger states having less people in them.

• Therefore those in smaller states have more powerful votes in terms of how much they can swing the electoral votes

While in average sized states this swing is very minute, if you live in a particularly large state or a very small state, the effect can be very large

Vermont Texas

WyomingCalifornia

BUT WAIT…

Isn’t the whole point of the Electoral College to protect the smaller states from the bigger states? By giving the smaller states a bigger electoral voice, isn’t the

system protecting these smaller states?

This means the president will have to pay attention to the smaller states.

However, The System Is Failing To Do ThisOf the top few places visited in the last few months of the election, only two of the smaller states, New Hampshire and Maine are visited. The system has hardly helped them gain more attention!

In addition, some very large states, such as California, Texas and New York are missing from this map! Why would such highly populated areas not be visited on the final 2 months of the campaign?

In fact, the majority of time and money spent in the run-up to the election all centres on 4 states, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Virginia!

Why is this?

The Winner Takes It All!• When a candidate wins a state, they receive all of the

electoral college votes for that state, it does not matter if they win by one vote, or by one million.

• Therefore it is not logical to spend time in ‘safe’ states, but to go to swing states that have a chance of going either way!

Is the Alternative Any Better?• However, opponents to a direct election of the President argue

that if this happens, candidates will centre themselves in densely populated cities, rather than sparse countryside, leading to vast areas of the US being ignored

• However, statistics shows that 100 largest cities of the US house too little people to cause candidates from getting out into the wilderness

The Final, and Biggest Criticism of The Electoral College.

• The two flaws of the Electoral college combine here- by winning the smaller, over represented states, you get more electoral votes than the actual popular vote

• But then remember, this a winner-takes all system. So 100% of the vote is not needed. The minimum is 50% plus one.

Therefore by winning by one vote in all of the least populous states all the way up to New Jersey, you can become President with around 22% of the popular vote.

Unlikely? Yes. Winning Without a Popular Majority? It Happens.

3 times in 55 elections is more that 5% failure rate.

Comparison to the UK

• Like in the UK, the system tends to exaggerate the result for the winner

• 50% is not required in constituencies, only the MOST votes, so could even be more unrepresentative than the US system

• Additionally, some UK votes may be worth more than others due to unequal constituency populations, with less people voting for one MP in some areas than others.

REFERENDUMS AND INITIATIVES

Direct Democracy in the US.

• REFERENDUMS• The US uses referendums to answer specific questions

given to the electorate. • In some states, measures passed in the state

legislature have to be further ratified by a referendum. • They are a top down device for gauging voters

opinions. • All states (excluding Delaware) have a requirement

that all amendments to the state constitution must be approved by a referendum.

Example: Florida 2012

• Florida proposed a whole raft of constitutional amendments to be made at the 2012 election, 12 in total

• All were small changes, with a wide range of results• 7 were defeated, 1 section removed from the

constitution and 4 were passed• This shows the strength and precision of the

referendum system in some US states.• http://election.dos.state.fl.us/initiatives/initiativelist

.asp?year=2012&initstatus=ALL&MadeBallot=Y&ElecType=GEN

• INITIATIVES• Occurs in some states, and allows citizens to initiate a

proposed state law or change in the law. • Occurs when enough signatures are gained on a petition

for an initiative, usually between 5% and 15% of the voting population

• This question is then put to the ballot• If supported by a majority vote this is usually binding on

the state legislature, but can still be struck down by the courts.

• Ironic in the sense the representatives are bypassed for voters to make their own laws!

• However does help legislating in areas where politicians avoid due to their high sensitivity like gay marriage or abortion.

Case Study: Washington State 2012• In 2012, Washington State held two referendums resulting

from initiatives, one on gay marriage and one on legalising recreational marijuana

• Both measures passed, with gay marriage becoming legal as soon as the result was certified.

• However, marijuana has not become legalised immediately, as it conflicts with federal law. The US Drug enforcement agency reminded Washingtonians that according to Federal law it was still a banned substance and laws against it would still be enforced.

• Clearly despite the straight democracy of a referendum, the courts and this time federal government can get in the way.

• http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/07/politics/marijuana-legalization

RECALL ELECTIONS

• A recall election is where registered voters are allowed to recall an elected state or local official from office once a signature petition and evidence of corrupt or incompetent behaviour has been presented.

• There are no federal recall elections, and are rare in states.

• The main argument for these elections are they make elected officials more responsive to the public’s wishes.

• However they have been criticised, saying the motive may be purely political, and not linked with corruption or incompetence.

CASE STUDY: Governor Gray Davis of California

• Gray Davis was a Democrat Governor of California, elected in 1998 and again in 2002.

• 11 months after his re-election he was recalled after a petition gained enough signatures.

• He was recalled for his handling of the crisis in the state’s electricity supply

• The election went in favour of the Republican candidate, Arnold Schwarzenegger, over a new Democrat candidate and many other candidates.

Comparison to Britain

• The UK lacks initiatives and recall elections• The UK has never acted to an major public issue with a

referendum. While public pressure leading to a referendum could be seen as somewhat like a referendum, most are planned out by political parties long beforehand, such as the AV referendum being party of Lib Dem aims in government, not due to public pressure.

• The UK also holds referendums nationally generally, but does hold some locally on devolution of power and independence

• Recall elections do not occur, but many MPs may feel forced to resign and allow a by-election if they have become disgraced.